I can’t track this interview down, and would be interested to see what he actually said in full.

If true, it would not be surprising, since in Chapter 12 of Trump’s book Crippled America: How to Make America Great Again (New York, 2015), even if supposedly largely ghostwritten, we find passages praising infrastructure projects as a way to create jobs and even invoking the Keynesian multiplier and the positive effects of such infrastructure stimulus on private sector economic activity. “If we do what we have to do correctly,” we read, “we can create the biggest economic boom in this country since the New Deal when our vast infrastructure was first put into place.” There are hints that deficit-financed spending is envisaged as the way to pay for this.

15 comments:

Trump has advocated tax cuts across the board. At the same time he wants to maintain social security and medicare, two of Americas most expensive social programs. Building the wall and securing the border won;t be cheap wither. He also has said good things about medicaid and wants to improve our physical infrastructure. Top that off with his belief in revamping the military and making it more powerful and modern and what you're left with is a massive spending spree with no real talk of cuts anywhere.

(1) how does the fact that his company makes things in China now mean that he couldn't impose protectionism as president and stop the loss of US manufacturing? lol

(2) also Trump has broken with the neocons and again and again with the worst and most extreme aspects of US foreign policy, but still we hear this B.S. that he is worse than Hillary, to whom a number of neocons are now flocking.

how does the fact that his company makes things in China now mean that he couldn't impose protectionism as president and stop the loss of US manufacturing? lol

Oh I dunno - Acting in accordance with your stated beliefs? Avoiding hypocrisy? "He who is faithful in a very little is faithful also in much. He who is dishonest in a very little is also dishonest in much" - As a famous ancient itinerant Palestinian was known for saying.

Deficits are not inherently bad. Depends how you spend it. There's a lot of infrastructure that needs work. Trump is frankly more likely to spend on useful things than public sector union owned Hillary is.

Lk, what with Trump's foreign policy statements I can't see what your fixation is with him. He seems like he would draw down US involvement in the Middle East (although who knows what he'll say next week.) Since you seem to not think US interference has caused anything, and put it all down to "Muh Intrinsic Muslim Evil" it would seem like you'd be fine with more wars over there,as long as it provided a Keynesian stimulus?

Kevin's argument makes no sense on its face. What is a plausible mechanism by which Western interference might mess things up? By unleashing ills already there, by disrupting balances between them. But then you are right and his absurd claims are wrong.

Trump is going to win, I think. All the pollsters are too biased to see the truth. But here it is.

Everyone knows Clinton. They do not know Trump. When something like a convention happens more people are exposed to the arguments of both candidates. This usually leads to a poll bump for each candidate. The relative strength of this bump can tell you a lot about what voters that are currently undecided are going to do when the end of the election cycle comes up and they are flooded by the media with the candidates' statements just before they make up their mind.

Today is five days after the Democratic convention. Clinton has bounced 1.2 points. Five days after the Republican convention Trump had bounced 3 points.

Trump's post convention bounce is more than double Clinton's as of today. I think this says a lot about how the undecideds will move when election day approaches.

The way I see Trump winning is because he offers hope. It was the same thing about Brexit, Bremain was basically saying that things are as good as they can get. Things like Putin don't matter to most US voters, I don't understand why Hillary is beating that drum. I think most ordinary americans agree with elite's take on Putin, it just doesn't matter to them that much.

The polls are not "biased." If you follow the polls during the primaries they consistently showed him ahead in places he won, and not ahead in places he lost. Bernie Sanders was the only one who pulled real surprises. Also, your numbers appear to be off:

Trump has ignited enthusiastic support, but it's only among a certain crowd. I don't think Independents, Democrats, Hispanics, Women or Veterans are going to break for him. I could be wrong, but I'm betting otherwise.